Akhigbe v St Edwards Home Ltd & Ors [2019] UKEAT 0110_18_0803 (8 March 2019)

Akhigbe v St Edwards Home Ltd & Ors [2019] UKEAT 0110_18_0803 (8 March 2019)

The employment judge erred in requiring a fresh early conciliation certificate for the second claim, as both claims related to the same 'matter' under section 18A(1) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996. However, the second claim was a manifest abuse of process as it duplicated the first claim and sought to add a new claim that could and should have been litigated in the first claim. The judge's decision to reject the claim was upheld on this alternative ground.

Citation
[2019] UKEAT 0110_18_0803
Parties
Appellant/claimant: D Akihigbe; Respondents: St Edwards Home Limited (SEHL) and the Berkeley Group plc (BG)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Rejection of Second Claim by Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Early Conciliation Requirement, Abuse of Process, Employment Tribunal Procedure, Unfair Dismissal, Race Discrimination
Employment Law Early Conciliation Requirement Abuse of Process Employment Tribunal Procedure Unfair Dismissal Race Discrimination

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D Akihigbe

Appellant/claimant

St Edwards Home Limited (SEHL) and the Berkeley Group plc (BG)

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Rejection of Second Claim by Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second claim related to the same 'matter' as the first claim for early conciliation purposes under section 18A(1) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether a fresh early conciliation certificate was required for the second claim
  3. 3 Whether the second claim constituted an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The employment judge erred in requiring a fresh early conciliation certificate for the second claim, as both claims related to the same 'matter' under section 18A(1) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996. However, the second claim was a manifest abuse of process as it duplicated the first claim and sought to add a new claim that could and should have been litigated in the first claim. The judge's decision to reject the claim was upheld on this alternative ground.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The decision to reject the second claim is upheld on the ground of abuse of process under Rule 12(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.